tag:theconversation.com,2011:/fr/topics/parental-leave-4269/articlesParental leave – The Conversation2019-02-20T11:38:34Ztag:theconversation.com,2011:article/1083232019-02-20T11:38:34Z2019-02-20T11:38:34ZPaid family leave is an investment in public health, not a handout<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/259179/original/file-20190214-1751-uhky3n.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&amp;rect=724%2C0%2C4500%2C3050&amp;q=45&amp;auto=format&amp;w=496&amp;fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">Protected time for new families could pay health dividends later.</span> <span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.shutterstock.com/image-photo/parents-their-newborn-baby-boy-on-729856267">Jacob Lund/Shutterstock</a></span></figcaption></figure><p>Most Americans – <a href="https://www.nationalreview.com/corner/the-president-and-women-in-white-have-paid-leave-in-common/">on both sides of the political aisle</a> – <a href="http://fortune.com/2016/04/15/an-overwhelming-majority-of-americans-support-paid-parental-leave/">say they support</a> <a href="https://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/ivanka-paid-parental-leave-hearing_us_5b467744e4b022fdcc55b790">paid parental leave</a>. However, we haven’t yet found the political will to make it happen. In part, that’s because the discussion always seems to start with the question, “<a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2019/01/06/upshot/a-california-dream-for-paid-leave-has-an-old-problem-how-to-pay-for-it.html">How do we pay for it</a>?” </p>
<p>That question goes only halfway, though. <a href="https://scholar.google.com/citations?user=q676bXMAAAAJ&amp;hl=en&amp;oi=ao">As a researcher who focuses on stress and health within families</a>, I believe there’s a more important question to ask: “How do we pay for the lack of parental leave?” In other words, how does the stress of a rapid return to work affect parents, and in turn, cost society as a whole? Recently, I <a href="http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/amp0000376">sought to answer this question</a> by <a href="https://doi.org/10.31234/osf.io/64f37">delving into research</a> on the many changes that new parents experience in the first weeks, months, and years after the birth of a new child – and the possibility that all these changes might not just compromise children’s well-being, but also put parents’ long-term health at risk. </p>
<h2>A global outlier</h2>
<p>How fast should women “bounce back” after giving birth? Instantly, at least according to celebrity magazines. And many workplaces in the United States deliver the same message. The typical American maternity leave <a href="https://www.today.com/health/two-weeks-after-baby-more-new-moms-cut-maternity-leave-4B11229443">lasts only 10 weeks</a>, and a quarter of new mothers <a href="http://inthesetimes.com/article/18151/the-real-war-on-families">return to work within two weeks</a> of delivering a child.</p>
<p><iframe id="TJFvx" class="tc-infographic-datawrapper" src="https://datawrapper.dwcdn.net/TJFvx/3/" height="400px" width="100%" style="border: none" frameborder="0"></iframe></p>
<p>The U.S. is <a href="https://www.worldpolicycenter.org/policies/is-paid-leave-available-to-mothers-and-fathers-of-infants/is-paid-leave-available-for-fathers-of-infants">one of the only countries in the world</a> that does not <a href="https://www.npr.org/sections/itsallpolitics/2015/07/15/422957640/lots-of-other-countries-mandate-paid-leave-why-not-the-us">guarantee paid leave to new parents</a>. The 1993 Family Medical and Leave Act provides for unpaid leave – but almost half of U.S. workers are not eligible, and many cannot afford time off without pay. Compare this to the rest of the globe, where <a href="https://www.thisisinsider.com/maternity-leave-around-the-world-2018-5">paid maternity leave is standard</a>, averaging 18 weeks internationally and extending beyond six months in many developed countries.</p>
<h2>New parent stress, long-term effects?</h2>
<p><a href="https://doi.org/10.1093/oxfordhb/9780190628963.013.23">Economists have examined paid family leave policies</a> and measured their impact on worker retention and productivity, as well as health outcomes. But their studies typically focus on population-level trends. As a psychologist whose work takes a more intimate look at family processes, I wondered: How does the stress of work-family conflict affect the well-being of new parents?</p>
<p>I reached out to Stanford economist and family leave policy expert <a href="https://scholar.google.com/citations?user=vuOKLC4AAAAJ&amp;hl=en&amp;oi=ao">Maya Rossin-Slater</a> to help digest the body of research on health and family leave. Together with developmental neuroscientist Diane Goldenberg, we reviewed existing studies and proposed future directions for research and policy in a <a href="http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/amp0000376">recent paper published in American Psychologist</a>. </p>
<p>Psychologists already know that the transition to parenthood is a high-risk time for <a href="https://www.nimh.nih.gov/health/publications/postpartum-depression-facts/index.shtml">mental health problems</a> like anxiety and depression. New parents are about <a href="https://www.postpartumdepression.org/resources/statistics/">twice as likely to report clinically significant depression</a> as are adults at other life stages.</p>
<p>Physical health risks may worsen during this time as well. For example, obesity: <a href="https://www.fitpregnancy.com/pregnancy/pregnancy-health/how-pregnancy-weight-gain-could-contribute-obesity-epidemic">many mothers gain in excess</a> of physician-recommended weight guidelines during pregnancy, and may struggle to <a href="https://www.laboratoryequipment.com/article/2019/01/changes-metabolism-lead-postpartum-weight-gain">lose this weight after birth</a>. New fathers also gain weight: <a href="https://digest.bps.org.uk/2018/07/25/weight-gain-in-new-fathers-is-a-real-phenomenon-thats-been-subjected-to-a-striking-lack-of-research/">“Dad bod” is real</a>.</p>
<figure class="align-center zoomable">
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/258587/original/file-20190212-174873-k8rl48.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&amp;q=45&amp;auto=format&amp;w=1000&amp;fit=clip"><img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/258587/original/file-20190212-174873-k8rl48.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&amp;q=45&amp;auto=format&amp;w=754&amp;fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/258587/original/file-20190212-174873-k8rl48.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&amp;q=45&amp;auto=format&amp;w=600&amp;h=338&amp;fit=crop&amp;dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/258587/original/file-20190212-174873-k8rl48.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&amp;q=30&amp;auto=format&amp;w=600&amp;h=338&amp;fit=crop&amp;dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/258587/original/file-20190212-174873-k8rl48.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&amp;q=15&amp;auto=format&amp;w=600&amp;h=338&amp;fit=crop&amp;dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/258587/original/file-20190212-174873-k8rl48.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&amp;q=45&amp;auto=format&amp;w=754&amp;h=424&amp;fit=crop&amp;dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/258587/original/file-20190212-174873-k8rl48.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&amp;q=30&amp;auto=format&amp;w=754&amp;h=424&amp;fit=crop&amp;dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/258587/original/file-20190212-174873-k8rl48.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&amp;q=15&amp;auto=format&amp;w=754&amp;h=424&amp;fit=crop&amp;dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px"></a>
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Dads have big adjustments during this transition, too.</span>
<span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://unsplash.com/photos/0mRerwRVqVA">Zach Vessels/Unsplash</a>, <a class="license" href="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/">CC BY</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>Stress influences both mental health and weight gain, and may also <a href="https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2012/04/120402162546.htm">affect immune and inflammatory processes</a> that can contribute to long-term health risks. Costly chronic diseases like heart disease and cancer drain the economy, and yet few researchers have zeroed in on the transition to parenthood as a potential inflection point in risk for these diseases. Are these risks magnified when parents lack protected time to recover from birth and adjust to parenthood? If so, the U.S. may be setting up new parents – and especially low income parents – to fail. </p>
<p>In making sense of the research that speaks to health in parents, we started by first identifying what changes over the transition to parenthood in order to spotlight potential areas of vulnerability.</p>
<h2>Neurobiological changes</h2>
<p>At the neurobiological level, researchers are finding that new parents’ hormones and brains may be particularly changeable – what scientists call plastic.</p>
<p>Research on rodents has found that <a href="https://doi.org/10.1038/nrn2280">pregnancy hormones remodel the maternal rat brain</a>, helping prep the mother-to-be for infant care. Human mothers also show dramatic changes in hormones across pregnancy and the postpartum period. One neuroimaging study scanned women pre-pregnancy and then tracked them over several years, scanning them again after childbirth. Surprisingly, <a href="https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/pregnancy-causes-lasting-changes-in-a-womans-brain/">women’s brains actually shrunk</a> over the transition to motherhood, showing reductions in volume particularly in areas linked with social cognition. Pruning may have helped these areas work more efficiently to support caregiving, since women who lost more brain volume also reported stronger attachment to their infants. </p>
<p>Fathers may also undergo neurobiological transformation across the transition to parenthood. Studies have found <a href="https://theconversation.com/postpartum-depression-can-affect-dads-and-their-hormones-may-be-to-blame-81310">decreased testosterone in new dads</a> and <a href="https://doi.org/10.1080/17470919.2014.933713">changes in men’s brain volume</a> in early parenthood, for example. </p>
<p>These neurobiological changes may shape parents’ long-term health, although research evidence is still scant. Scientists also don’t know much about how stress affects the neural and hormonal changes that can accompany parenthood. But what we do know is that new parents are undergoing big biological changes, making this time a sensitive window for the brain. </p>
<h2>Psychological and social change</h2>
<figure class="align-right zoomable">
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/258354/original/file-20190211-174857-1wgult6.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&amp;q=45&amp;auto=format&amp;w=1000&amp;fit=clip"><img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/258354/original/file-20190211-174857-1wgult6.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&amp;q=45&amp;auto=format&amp;w=237&amp;fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/258354/original/file-20190211-174857-1wgult6.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&amp;q=45&amp;auto=format&amp;w=600&amp;h=900&amp;fit=crop&amp;dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/258354/original/file-20190211-174857-1wgult6.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&amp;q=30&amp;auto=format&amp;w=600&amp;h=900&amp;fit=crop&amp;dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/258354/original/file-20190211-174857-1wgult6.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&amp;q=15&amp;auto=format&amp;w=600&amp;h=900&amp;fit=crop&amp;dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/258354/original/file-20190211-174857-1wgult6.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&amp;q=45&amp;auto=format&amp;w=754&amp;h=1131&amp;fit=crop&amp;dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/258354/original/file-20190211-174857-1wgult6.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&amp;q=30&amp;auto=format&amp;w=754&amp;h=1131&amp;fit=crop&amp;dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/258354/original/file-20190211-174857-1wgult6.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&amp;q=15&amp;auto=format&amp;w=754&amp;h=1131&amp;fit=crop&amp;dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px"></a>
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">A new baby can come with a lot of shocks to the system.</span>
<span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://unsplash.com/photos/XHF_paR2PUE">Jessica To'oto'o/Unsplash</a>, <a class="license" href="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/">CC BY</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>Although many parents eagerly await the arrival of their new baby, becoming a parent can also be challenging, isolating and even overwhelming. Infants require constant care, which can be cognitively and emotionally taxing and physically exhausting. For parents who must return to work soon after birth, the scramble to find trustworthy childcare can also take a financial toll. </p>
<p>Large studies have found that <a href="https://theconversation.com/have-children-heres-how-kids-ruin-your-romantic-relationship-57944">well-being takes a dip</a> during early parenthood; one found that becoming a parent spurred a <a href="https://doi.org/10.1007/s13524-015-0413-2">larger decline in happiness</a> than events like divorce, unemployment or the death of a partner. <a href="https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/home-base/201602/can-you-babyproof-your-relationship">Couples’ relationship satisfaction also nosedives</a> in the postpartum period, as they adjust to new roles and responsibilities.</p>
<p>All of these psychological changes may set parents up for heightened mental health risk, reflected in the elevated prevalence of depression and anxiety during this time. </p>
<h2>Behavioral change</h2>
<p>Parents’ everyday routines are upended after a baby’s arrival.</p>
<p>Take sleep. Anyone who has lived with an infant knows they wake up often at night. It’s been estimated that <a href="https://doi.org/10.1093/aje/kws246">parents lose about 80 hours</a> of sleep a year for the first few years of a child’s life. Fathers may actually <a href="https://www.npr.org/sections/health-shots/2016/04/05/473002684/for-new-parents-dad-may-be-the-one-missing-the-most-sleep">wind up more sleep-deprived than mothers</a>, in part because they return to the workplace sooner. </p>
<p>New parents also report <a href="https://doi.org/10.1542/peds.2010-3218">lower levels of physical exercise, may eat less healthy diets</a> and have fewer opportunities to pursue hobbies and get together with friends. Given that sleep, exercise and other healthy routines are strongly linked with well-being, these changes might help explain why new parents show heightened health risks across so many domains. In particular, scientists know that poor sleep increases vulnerability to <a href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.beem.2010.07.001">disease</a>, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1093/sleep/28.10.1289">obesity</a> and <a href="https://doi.org/10.1002/da.1041">mood disorders</a>, so sleep deprivation in the postpartum period may be a <a href="https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1160560/">key driver</a> of the risks that new parents experience. </p>
<h2>Risk and vulnerability</h2>
<p>So what can one conclude from all of this research? Like many windows of dynamic developmental change, the transition to parenthood is a time of transformation that can spur growth – but also brings vulnerability.</p>
<p>Changes in stress physiology, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1001/jama.298.14.1685">obesity, inflammation</a> and <a href="https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3181963/">mental health</a> contribute to a <a href="https://doi.org/10.1001/jama.298.14.1685">cascade of risks that predict costly cardiac and metabolic diseases</a> down the road. Paid family leave requires significant investment, but might save taxpayers money if it lessens the burden of these chronic diseases on the economy. And our review focused on parents’ health in adulthood, not even scratching the surface of the potential benefits to children that paid family leave policy can bring. For example, mothers with access to leave <a href="https://doi.org/10.1111/birt.12230">breastfeed longer</a>, and family leave has been linked with lower rates of <a href="https://doi.org/10.1002/pam.22012">ADHD and obesity in young children</a>. </p>
<figure class="align-center zoomable">
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/259181/original/file-20190214-1754-1yh94n0.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&amp;q=45&amp;auto=format&amp;w=1000&amp;fit=clip"><img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/259181/original/file-20190214-1754-1yh94n0.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&amp;q=45&amp;auto=format&amp;w=754&amp;fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/259181/original/file-20190214-1754-1yh94n0.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&amp;q=45&amp;auto=format&amp;w=600&amp;h=400&amp;fit=crop&amp;dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/259181/original/file-20190214-1754-1yh94n0.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&amp;q=30&amp;auto=format&amp;w=600&amp;h=400&amp;fit=crop&amp;dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/259181/original/file-20190214-1754-1yh94n0.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&amp;q=15&amp;auto=format&amp;w=600&amp;h=400&amp;fit=crop&amp;dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/259181/original/file-20190214-1754-1yh94n0.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&amp;q=45&amp;auto=format&amp;w=754&amp;h=503&amp;fit=crop&amp;dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/259181/original/file-20190214-1754-1yh94n0.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&amp;q=30&amp;auto=format&amp;w=754&amp;h=503&amp;fit=crop&amp;dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/259181/original/file-20190214-1754-1yh94n0.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&amp;q=15&amp;auto=format&amp;w=754&amp;h=503&amp;fit=crop&amp;dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px"></a>
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Investment in family leave now, payoffs in better health later?</span>
<span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.shutterstock.com/image-photo/asian-parents-newborn-baby-close-portrait-733313083">paulaphoto/Shutterstock.com</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>Research finds that <a href="https://www.webmd.com/balance/news/20180504/loneliness-rivals-obesity-smoking-as-health-risk">loneliness is worse for your health</a> than smoking cigarettes, suggesting that connections with others may play a profound role in population health. Public health investment has led to <a href="https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2018/06/18/smoking-united-states-cigarette-sales/713002002/">dramatic declines in smoking</a> over the last four decades, but hasn’t yet truly tackled <a href="https://doi.org/10.1037/amp0000103">social cohesion as a public health challenge</a>. What better place to start than by facilitating the first and arguably most important set of social connections – those that blossom within a new family.</p>
<p>This topic is personal for me. When my first child was born, I was a psychotherapy intern at a veterans hospital. As a federal employee, I didn’t qualify for state disability and, as a contract employee, couldn’t access Department of Veterans Affairs leave. My husband, a freelancer, could not take time off without losing income, and I couldn’t quit my job – we needed the health insurance. My wonderful supervisors let me take unpaid time off. But money was tight. Nearby daycares had yearlong wait lists and cost half our combined income. I’m an Ivy League grad with a doctorate, one of the lucky ones, but could barely afford the cost of having a child in the United States. </p>
<p>It doesn’t have to be this way. If Americans reconceptualize parents as a precious national resource, child-rearing as an enterprise that secures the long-term future of the U.S. economy and the transition to parenthood as a window for long-term health, then we can decide as a society that family leave is worth the investment. And there is hope on the horizon: Less than a year after Tammy Duckworth became the <a href="https://chicago.suntimes.com/news/tammy-duckworth-birth-girl-first-senator-have-baby-maile-pearl-bowlsbey-office/">first senator to give birth while in office</a>, the 2018 midterm elections <a href="https://www.workingmother.com/number-working-moms-in-congress-will-double-in-2019">doubled the number of working mothers in Congress</a>. When President Trump mentioned paid family leave in his <a href="https://www.foxbusiness.com/politics/at-sotu-trump-says-federal-budget-will-include-paid-family-leave">State of the Union address</a>, legislators from both parties applauded – a rare moment of unity in an otherwise divided Congress. At long last, the United States’ status as a global outlier on family leave policy may be coming to an end.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/108323/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Darby Saxbe receives funding from the National Science Foundation. </span></em></p>The transition to parenthood comes with plenty of stress. A psychology researcher suggests that paid family leave could help lift some of the burden – with positive health benefits down the road.Darby Saxbe, Assistant Professor of Psychology, University of Southern California – Dornsife College of Letters, Arts and SciencesLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/948742018-12-12T14:42:17Z2018-12-12T14:42:17ZFixing gender gaps isn't just about women – men will benefit from a more equal society too<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/249710/original/file-20181210-76968-5wepyh.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&amp;q=45&amp;auto=format&amp;w=496&amp;fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">We&#39;ve got this. </span> <span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.shutterstock.com/download/confirm/581516992?src=n1qNzvr4lUThnzRDmFLJng-1-55&amp;size=medium_jpg">Liderina/Shutterstock</a></span></figcaption></figure><p>The UK is in the middle of a conversation about the <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/news/ng-interactive/2018/apr/05/women-are-paid-less-than-men-heres-how-to-fix-it">gender pay gap</a>. And rightly so. No matter how you look at it, the average <a href="http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-43651780">9.7% difference</a> between the collective earnings of men and women suggests a structural disadvantage to women.</p>
<p>Yet the pay gap lays bare another issue that’s not talked about so often – the way society currently addresses issues that have a negative impact on men.</p>
<p>One recent example was coverage of the new-found <a href="https://www.ons.gov.uk/employmentandlabourmarket/peopleinwork/employmentandemployeetypes/articles/thecommutinggapmenaccountfor65ofcommuteslastingmorethananhour/2018-11-07">“gender commute gap”</a>, which found that women’s journeys to work each day take significantly less time than men’s – often 15 minutes for women, compared with over an hour for men. </p>
<p><a href="https://www.theguardian.com/world/2018/nov/07/childcare-constraints-forcing-more-women-to-work-closer-to-home">Coverage</a> of this was almost exclusively that it was a disadvantage to women, and was linked to gendered expectations, with unequal divisions of childcare responsibilities constraining women to work closer to home. In turn, this could be contributing to the gender pay gap, although as the <a href="https://www.ifs.org.uk/publications/13673">Institute for Fiscal Studies noted</a> any such link is yet to be established. </p>
<p>But there was little discussion of the concerning implications this gender commuting gap holds for men. With each extra minute of travel, the mental well-being of the commuter decreases, according to a 2014 report on commuting by the <a href="http://webarchive.nationalarchives.gov.uk/20160129145729/http:/www.ons.gov.uk/ons/rel/wellbeing/measuring-national-well-being/commuting-and-personal-well-being--2014/index.html">Office for National Statistics</a>. The difference in well-being was most stark between commutes of around an hour, and those of 15 minutes or less – neatly overlapping with the difference in travel times between men and women. Add to this less free time to devote to family responsibilities and there is a clear <a href="https://www.thetimes.co.uk/magazine/the-sunday-times-magazine/why-arent-successful-middle-aged-fathers-happy-w59026xnw">negative impact on men</a> of their longer commutes. </p>
<h2>Benefits to fathers of paternity leave</h2>
<p>This is symptomatic of a wider problem with how we talk about equality in society. In a <a href="https://publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm201719/cmselect/cmwomeq/358/358.pdf">report</a>, published earlier this year, MPs on the Women and Equalities Committee recommended an overhaul of paternity leave after statistics suggested that <a href="https://www.emwllp.com/latest/claimed-shared-parental/">as few as 1%</a> of UK fathers are taking what leave they are entitled to. This is in spite of significant numbers <a href="https://www.workingfamilies.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2017/01/Modern-Families-Index_Full-Report.pdf">wanting to take a more active role.</a></p>
<p>This discrepancy is due to a range of factors, including fathers being unable to afford leave, and stereotypes and workplace attitudes which make men unable, or uncomfortable to ask for it. Fathers report <a href="http://data.parliament.uk/writtenevidence/committeeevidence.svc/evidencedocument/women-and-equalities-committee/fathers-and-the-workplace/written/47916.pdf">similar marginalisation and belittling</a> in other activities they do as parents – including at <a href="https://www.iriss.org.uk/resources/insights/good-practice-fathers-children-and-family-services">schools, nurseries and healthcare services</a>. Almost as though to prove the point, the committee’s report itself slips into referring to <a href="https://publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm201719/cmselect/cmwomeq/358/358.pdf">fathers as “second parents”</a>. </p>
<p>This means that men are currently missing out. Research shows that there are <a href="http://www.fatherhoodinstitute.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/12/Cash-and-carry-Full-Report-PDF.pdf">a range of benefits</a> of fathers taking on greater childcare responsibilities: beyond the obvious benefits to child development, it can also improve the mental health and fulfilment of men. This has a knock-on impact on men’s physical health. Involved fathers are <a href="http://www.ecdip.org/docs/pdf/IF%20Father%20Res%20Summary%20(KD).pdf">less likely</a> to suffer from accidental or premature death, hospital admissions, and substance abuse. </p>
<figure class="align-center ">
<img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/249717/original/file-20181210-76968-fzncnq.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&amp;q=45&amp;auto=format&amp;w=754&amp;fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/249717/original/file-20181210-76968-fzncnq.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&amp;q=45&amp;auto=format&amp;w=600&amp;h=400&amp;fit=crop&amp;dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/249717/original/file-20181210-76968-fzncnq.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&amp;q=30&amp;auto=format&amp;w=600&amp;h=400&amp;fit=crop&amp;dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/249717/original/file-20181210-76968-fzncnq.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&amp;q=15&amp;auto=format&amp;w=600&amp;h=400&amp;fit=crop&amp;dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/249717/original/file-20181210-76968-fzncnq.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&amp;q=45&amp;auto=format&amp;w=754&amp;h=503&amp;fit=crop&amp;dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/249717/original/file-20181210-76968-fzncnq.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&amp;q=30&amp;auto=format&amp;w=754&amp;h=503&amp;fit=crop&amp;dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/249717/original/file-20181210-76968-fzncnq.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&amp;q=15&amp;auto=format&amp;w=754&amp;h=503&amp;fit=crop&amp;dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Towards a more equal society.</span>
<span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.shutterstock.com/download/confirm/1143653393?src=b7aeSZLkXADU2JRy0J8mzQ-1-17&amp;size=medium_jpg">Andriy Blokhin/Shutterstock</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>Yet while more active involvement improves the well-being of fathers and children, this important research is largely ignored when making the case for tackling the low uptake of paternity leave. </p>
<p>Instead, the overwhelming argument is that issues around paternity leave should be tackled <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/money/2018/mar/20/mps-call-for-12-weeks-of-paternity-leave-to-address-gender-pay-gap">to solve the gender pay gap</a>. This was the reason the committee report <a href="https://www.parliament.uk/business/committees/committees-a-z/commons-select/women-and-equalities-committee/news-parliament-2015/fathers-and-the-workplace-launch-16-17/">was even commissioned at all</a>.</p>
<p>To be sure, if addressing the paternity leave issue <a href="https://www.personneltoday.com/hr/why-fatherhood-holds-the-key-to-solving-the-gender-pay-gap/">can help</a> solve the gender pay gap, then that’s a reason to act. But it’s surely not the only, nor even the main, reason why we should care about the low take up of paternity leave. </p>
<p>As I’ve argued <a href="https://inherentlyhuman.wordpress.com/2018/04/03/womens-rights-and-male-parasites-when-paternity-leave-becomes-a-womens-issue/">elsewhere</a>, it’s harmful to treat paternity leave as merely a pathway to gender pay parity, rather than a goal in itself. It not only belittles the disadvantages faced by fathers, but also risks limiting the effectiveness of whatever measures are taken to resolve difficulties within parental leave. And that doesn’t help anyone.</p>
<h2>How we talk about equality</h2>
<p>There are a number of challenges <a href="https://www.telegraph.co.uk/health-fitness/mind/international-mens-day-2018-shocking-statistics-need-know/">facing men and boys today</a>. These range from the disproportionately high rate of <a href="http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-43572779">male suicide</a>, to acute under-reporting and stigma surrounding <a href="https://abcnews.go.com/Entertainment/ive-felt-emasculated-terry-crews-sheds-light-men/story?id=51181942">male victims of sexual assault</a>, as well as <a href="https://www.menshealthforum.org.uk/key-data-mental-health">mental illness</a>. But when attention is devoted to addressing these challenges, it’s often seen merely as a way to enhance the rights of women. </p>
<p>The question “what about the men?” is vital, we’re often told – in the <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/public-leaders-network/2018/mar/08/international-womens-day-stop-patching-men">media, and by equality campaigners</a> – because “we want to protect women and girls”. It’s vital, we’re told, because the challenges facing men impact women in many ways, such as the weight that men’s mental health struggles put on women, for example as carers “responsible” for <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/public-leaders-network/2018/mar/08/international-womens-day-stop-patching-men">“patching men up”</a>. This is not just a matter of rhetoric: there are real consequences for society, and particularly for men.</p>
<p>It’s positive that women and wider society will benefit from tackling problems faced by men. But we also need to tackle these issues – and the outdated attitudes and stereotypes about men’s role at work and at home – because of the harm this does to men and to their well-being. This is a valuable pursuit in itself. Not framing it as such leaves a potentially harmful gap in the way society talks and acts on gender equality.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/94874/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Kyle Murray does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>There is a wide problem with the way society talks about gender equality.Kyle Murray, Teaching Fellow in Public Law and Human Rights & PhD Candidate, Durham UniversityLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/947702018-04-19T10:50:12Z2018-04-19T10:50:12ZThe US is stingier with child care and maternity leave than the rest of the world<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/215479/original/file-20180418-163991-i3dpgj.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&amp;q=45&amp;auto=format&amp;w=496&amp;fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">Preschool today, success tomorrow.
</span> <span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="http://www.apimages.com/metadata/Index/Preschool-Child-Care-Costs/f685a528405941b09676c5bc282af732/37/0">AP Photo/Elaine Thompson</a></span></figcaption></figure><p>In most American families led by couples, both parents are <a href="https://www.bls.gov/news.release/famee.nr0.htm">in the workforce</a>. At the same time, nearly <a href="https://www.census.gov/newsroom/press-releases/2016/cb16-192.html">1 in 4</a> U.S. children are being raised by single moms. </p>
<p>Yet child care is generally <a href="https://www.epi.org/publication/child-care-affordability/">unaffordable</a> and paid leave is not available to <a href="https://iwpr.org/publications/paid-parental-leave-in-the-united-states-what-the-data-tell-us-about-access-usage-and-economic-and-health-benefits/">most U.S. parents</a>.</p>
<p>Around the world, however, most employed women automatically get paid maternity leave. And in most wealthy countries, they also have access to affordable child care. </p>
<p>These holes in the national safety net are a problem for many reasons, including one I’ve been <a href="https://scholar.google.com/citations?user=Jc-a1IwAAAAJ&amp;hl=en">researching</a> with my colleagues for years: Paid parental leave and child care help women <a href="https://doi.org/10.1093/sf/sou119">stay in the workforce</a> and <a href="http://journals.sagepub.com/doi/abs/10.1177/0730888415615385">earn higher wages</a> over time. This lack of parental leave and child care may explain why the U.S. is <a href="http://www.imf.org/en/Publications/WEO/Issues/2018/03/20/world-economic-outlook-april-2018#Chapter%202">no longer a leader</a> in women’s workforce participation. </p>
<h2>Maternity leave</h2>
<p>The U.S. is <a href="https://www.worldpolicycenter.org/sites/default/files/Work%20Family%20and%20Equity%20Index-How%20does%20the%20US%20measure%20up-Jan%202007.pdf">one of a handful of countries worldwide</a> that does not mandate paid maternity leave. The other four are the low-income nations of Lesotho, Liberia, Papua New Guinea and Swaziland. </p>
<p>Paid leave, which typically lasts at least 14 weeks, needs to be designed thoughtfully. When women can and do take two or even three years off after having a baby, as they may in Hungary, long leaves can limit mothers’ work experience and lead to <a href="http://gas.sagepub.com/content/25/1/5.abstract">discrimination</a>. </p>
<p>The <a href="https://www.dol.gov/general/topic/benefits-leave/fmla">1993 Family and Medical Leave Act</a> did mandate 12 weeks of unpaid job protected leave for some American workers. Yet most families can’t forgo the <a href="https://theconversation.com/women-earn-less-after-they-have-kids-despite-strong-credentials-94013">income that moms bring home</a>.</p>
<p><a href="http://www.oecd.org/els/family/database.htm">Denmark</a> offers what I think is a strong example. There, moms get almost 18 weeks of paid maternity leave and dads get two weeks of paid paternity leave. On top of that, couples get up to a total 32 weeks of parental leave, which parents can split. This policy grants parents both the time and resources necessary to care for children, without “mommy tracking” mothers. </p>
<p><iframe id="2lcy2" class="tc-infographic-datawrapper" src="https://datawrapper.dwcdn.net/2lcy2/6/" height="400px" width="100%" style="border: none" frameborder="0"></iframe></p>
<h2>Child care</h2>
<p>In many wealthy countries, child care and preschool are considered a mainstay of the educational system. But in the U.S., only about half of all children between the ages of 3 and 6 are getting publicly supported child care of any kind, including kindergarten, versus 99 percent of kids that age <a href="http://journals.sagepub.com/doi/abs/10.1177/0730888415615385">in France</a>. </p>
<p><iframe id="DWWHp" class="tc-infographic-datawrapper" src="https://datawrapper.dwcdn.net/DWWHp/3/" height="400px" width="100%" style="border: none" frameborder="0"></iframe></p>
<p>Interestingly, high-quality early childhood education programs are associated with many <a href="https://www.childtrends.org/indicators/child-care/">excellent outcomes</a> for children from lower-income families: higher graduation rates, along with lower rates of teen pregnancy and juvenile crime. </p>
<p>In other words, when governments <a href="https://www.jstor.org/stable/2117807?seq=1#page_scan_tab_contents">invest in child care</a> and maternity leave, it fosters a more productive, healthy and creative workforce.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/94770/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Joya Misra has received funding from the National Science Foundation and the Washington Center for Equitable Growth. </span></em></p>Research suggests that government spending on very young children is a good investment.Joya Misra, Professor of Sociology & Public Policy, University of Massachusetts AmherstLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/940132018-04-11T10:45:50Z2018-04-11T10:45:50ZWomen earn less after they have kids, despite strong credentials<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/214159/original/file-20180410-543-1789cxw.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&amp;q=45&amp;auto=format&amp;w=496&amp;fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">A working mom, off the clock</span> <span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.shutterstock.com/image-photo/portrait-happy-young-family-mother-kids-273907490?src=FWEKiw4_M0Ju2fyHCIva0Q-2-6">dotshock/Shutterstock.com</a></span></figcaption></figure><p>Women without kids have <a href="http://www.jstor.org/stable/2657415?origin=crossref&amp;seq=1">earned more</a> than employed mothers for decades or longer. But differences between these two kinds of workers, in terms of the <a href="http://www.pewsocialtrends.org/2010/05/06/the-new-demography-of-american-motherhood/">education under their belts</a> and the job experience on their resumes, are diminishing. </p>
<p>This manifestation of inequality is becoming a bigger problem, since the number of <a href="https://iwpr.org/publications/mothers-earn-just-71-percent-fathers-earn/">families relying</a> on the income these working parents take home is growing. The share of moms who make money has soared from <a href="https://data.bls.gov/cgi-bin/surveymost?fm">47 percent in 1975 to 70 percent in 2016</a>. </p>
<p>And the persistence of this disparity is a bit baffling because moms have stepped up their game by attaining higher levels of education and gaining work experience over the last 20 years. Based on my many years of <a href="https://scholar.google.com/citations?user=Jc-a1IwAAAAJ&amp;hl=en&amp;oi=ao">research</a> on how motherhood affects women’s paychecks, I’m certain that there are policies that can help fix this problem. </p>
<h2>Long-term gaps</h2>
<p>To try to understand the scope of this problem, I teamed up with economists <a href="https://www.linkedin.com/in/marta-murray-close-2355b618/">Marta Murray-Close</a> and <a href="https://www.umass.edu/economics/graduate/current-graduate-student/jee">Eunjung Jee</a> to do a <a href="http://equitablegrowth.org/working-papers/motherhood-penalties/">study</a> sponsored by the Washington Center for Equitable Growth, a think tank. By reviewing <a href="https://psidonline.isr.umich.edu/">federal data</a> pertaining to the earnings of about 14,000 women, we found out that mothers’ wages are even lower than we’d expected, even when they put time into their education and careers. </p>
<p>Moms and women without kids have both ratcheted up their educational credentials. But mothers, as it turns out, have gained more.</p>
<p><iframe id="N7Kn8" class="tc-infographic-datawrapper" src="https://datawrapper.dwcdn.net/N7Kn8/2/" height="400px" width="100%" style="border: none" frameborder="0"></iframe></p>
<p>Because mothers in the workplace are, on average, about five years older than childless women, they usually have had more job experience – but working moms have also ramped up their job qualifications over time.</p>
<p><iframe id="6VuXF" class="tc-infographic-datawrapper" src="https://datawrapper.dwcdn.net/6VuXF/2/" height="400px" width="100%" style="border: none" frameborder="0"></iframe></p>
<p>Yet moms with three kids earn about 18 percent less than childless women, and those with two kids take home wages that are about 13 percent lower. </p>
<p><iframe id="qEqoC" class="tc-infographic-datawrapper" src="https://datawrapper.dwcdn.net/qEqoC/2/" height="400px" width="100%" style="border: none" frameborder="0"></iframe></p>
<h2>What’s going on?</h2>
<p>It surprised us to see not only that working moms with just one kid still earn less, but also that the gap between their wages and those made by childless women has gotten even bigger in the past 30 years. </p>
<p>And this difference is not about parenthood, but really about gender and parenthood. While <a href="https://www.aeaweb.org/articles?id=10.1257/000282802320191606">mothers</a> generally earn less than childless women, <a href="http://journals.sagepub.com/doi/abs/10.1177/0891243207311593">fathers</a> typically earn more than men without kids.</p>
<p>What economists call the “<a href="http://www.jstor.org/stable/24461670?casa_token=Q1lZCePlF6QAAAAA:5R6WpXO-8UdbKXGYyhcELy0MA8Fe8zQLkKAuUiMbgvaaS6hEgRXGVL7GFlJAco4KbikBdzPxU2ENy18t-WUa6o85hyJZEF0Ro7IRhnpALajTLsepAQ&amp;seq=1#page_scan_tab_contents">gender wage gap</a>,” the difference between what men and women with similar qualifications earn for comparable work, is about parenthood too. </p>
<p>Discrimination may not explain all of these differences in wages, but it probably accounts for some of them.</p>
<p>For one thing, employers are <a href="http://www.jstor.org/stable/10.1086/511799">less likely</a> to respond to job applications – using the exact same resume – if the resume notes that a woman belongs to a parent-teacher organization. Mothers are also offered lower wages. </p>
<h2>Some solutions</h2>
<p>Are mothers’ wages penalized to the same degree everywhere? No, in fact, many countries have reduced this mommy penalty or even equalized pay between childless women and mothers. Research I’ve done with <a href="https://scholar.google.com/citations?user=nffazDwAAAAJ&amp;hl=en">Michelle Budig</a> and <a href="https://scholar.google.com/citations?user=mfei5d4AAAAJ&amp;hl=en">Irene Boeckmann</a> bears this out. </p>
<p>Consider what we learned about <a href="http://journals.sagepub.com/doi/abs/10.1177/0730888415615385">how things work in Sweden</a>. There, 86 percent of children between the ages of three and six, as well as 41 percent of kids who are even younger than that, are in publicly funded child care. Swedish couples, in addition, get to take up to 50 weeks of fully paid parental leave between them, on top of seven weeks of maternity leave and two weeks of paternity leave.</p>
<p>Perhaps unsurprisingly, the mommy penalty is far smaller in Sweden than the U.S. </p>
<p>That’s because child care helps working parents balance care responsibilities with employment. Whether women can take paid family leave also matters because it lets them stay in the workforce, making their caregiving responsibilities less likely to derail their careers. And when fathers also take leave, caregiving does not stigmatize women.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/94013/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Joya Misra has received funding from the Washington Center for Equitable Growth, the University of Massachusetts, Amherst College of Social and Behavioral Sciences, and from the National Science Foundation, for work reported here. </span></em></p>This penalty can amount to more than 15 percent of a mom's paycheck. Ramping up paid maternity leave and high-quality child care would probably help narrow the gap.Joya Misra, Professor of Sociology & Public Policy, University of Massachusetts AmherstLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/711172017-01-19T15:43:43Z2017-01-19T15:43:43ZWhy South Africa should redefine disability to include infertility<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/152990/original/image-20170117-23075-1um8fzf.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&amp;q=45&amp;auto=format&amp;w=496&amp;fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">shutterstock</span> </figcaption></figure><p>Infertility, the inability to conceive or sustain a successful pregnancy, affects more than 48 million couples in the <a href="http://journals.plos.org/plosmedicine/article?id=10.1371/journal.pmed.1001356">world</a>. Of these, ten million live in Sub-Saharan Africa. </p>
<p>The prevalence of infertility is much higher in developing countries than in the developed world. This is due to a number of factors, including poor access to assisted reproductive techniques and proper health care. </p>
<p>In South Africa, infertility occurs in 15% to 20% of the population. That’s one in every six couples. Most turn to surrogacy or adoption to become parents. But, under the country’s labour law, they <a href="https://theconversation.com/leave-for-surrogate-parents-in-south-africa-no-time-for-baby-steps-60071">don’t have the same rights</a> as conventional parents to take time off from work to care for their children.</p>
<p>This disparity constitutes unfair treatment. Unfortunately, the aggrieved parties do not have any recourse under the law to claim unfair, differential treatment. This is because infertility is not listed as a ground on which a claim of unfair discrimination may be lodged under the Employment Equity <a href="http://www.labour.gov.za/DOL/legislation/acts/employment-equity/employment-equity-act">Act</a>. </p>
<p>To address the anomaly and provide better protection for infertile employees, the most suitable option would be to consider infertility as a form of disability. But, to be considered as grounds to claim discrimination on the basis of disability, infertility would need to fall under the legal definition of disability. This is not the case in South Africa.</p>
<p>Also, the country does not have any independent disability legislation. It does have a code of good practice covering people with disabilities. But this is merely a guideline for employers and does not have the authority of law. </p>
<p>The Employment Equity Act – and the disability code – provide a restricted view of who is considered to have a disability. It simply states that to be classified as disabled, the physical impairment must substantially limit an employee’s prospects of entry to and advancement in employment. This narrow view excludes infertility from the definition.</p>
<p>This is at odds with the definition of disability provided for by the World Health Organisation (WHO), of which South Africa is a member. The WHO expressly <a href="http://www.who.int/classifications/icf/en/">classifies</a> infertility as a disability.</p>
<p>The US, for example, provides for disability in line with the WHO’s definition. The <a href="https://www.ada.gov/2010_regs.htm">Americans with Disabilities Act</a> describes disability as a physical impairment which affects various body systems, including the reproductive system. This covers infertility.</p>
<p>Zimbabwe, too, follows a more inclusive approach to what constitutes a disability. <a href="http://www.parlzim.gov.zw/acts-list/disabled-persons-act-17-01">Zimbabwe’s Disabled Persons Act</a> does not require the impairment to be substantially limiting. Rather, it provides that a person is considered to be disabled when a physical disability gives rise to physical, cultural and social barriers. This ultimately covers infertility.</p>
<h2>Infertility as a disability</h2>
<p><a href="http://www.gov.za/documents/constitution-republic-south-africa-1996">South Africa’s Constitution</a> provides that courts, forums and tribunals must consider international law when interpreting the <a href="http://www.gov.za/documents/constitution/chapter-2-bill-rights#39">Bill of Rights</a>.</p>
<p>Given the absence of a clear definition of disability and the limited view of who should be regarded as having a disability, it would be of immense value to consider what the WHO and the International Labour Organisation say on the subject. </p>
<p>This would create a path out of the current narrow approach to a more inclusive one. Including different types of impairments, such as infertility, under the umbrella of disability would protect people’s rights at work.</p>
<p>If infertility was to be considered a disability under South African labour law, it would require employers to reasonably accommodate infertile employees. This would include the duty to provide appropriate leave for the unique circumstances of surrogacy and adoption. </p>
<p>Failure to provide appropriate leave to these parents to care for their child would then be a breach of the employer’s duty. It would thus constitute indirect unfair discrimination on the basis of disability. Employees who have infertility would finally get recourse under the law to lodge a claim of unfair discrimination should they be treated differently in the awarding of parental leave due to their unique circumstances.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/71117/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>The authors do not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organization that would benefit from this article, and have disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>South Africa lacks a clear definition of disability – and its limited view of who should be regarded as having a disability in the labour market is at odds with international practice.Anri Botes, Senior Lecturer in Labour Law, North-West UniversityLaetitia Fourie, Lecturer in Mercantile Law, University of the Free StateLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/600712016-07-06T03:36:59Z2016-07-06T03:36:59ZLeave for surrogate parents in South Africa: no time for baby steps<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/129411/original/image-20160705-793-19vf7xp.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&amp;q=45&amp;auto=format&amp;w=496&amp;fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">A proposed new law is set to allow surrogate parents in South Africa to also take leave to care for their babies.</span> <span class="attribution"><span class="source">shutterstock</span></span></figcaption></figure><p>South Africa took a progressive step by legitimising surrogate parenthood with its <a href="http://www.justice.gov.za/legislation/acts/2005-038%20childrensact.pdf">Children’s Act</a>. However, it somehow failed to provide for leave from work for the concerned parents to care for their infants.</p>
<p>This could change if the <a href="http://www.gov.za/sites/www.gov.za/files/39448_1174.pdf">Labour Laws Amendment Bill</a> of 2015 is accepted.
The Bill proposes amendments to South Africa’s <a href="http://www.labour.gov.za/DOL/downloads/legislation/acts/basic-conditions-of-employment/Amended%20Act%20-%20Basic%20Conditions%20of%20Employment.pdf">Basic Conditions of Employment Act</a>, which regulates various types of leave. </p>
<p>Although the Bill is welcomed, there are a number of concerns pertaining to the duration and management of the various types of proposed leave that need to be urgently addressed – especially concerning the best interests of the child. </p>
<h2>Dawn of a new era</h2>
<p>Surrogate parenthood arises where one or two commissioning parents (the parties who enter into a surrogate motherhood agreement with a surrogate mother) agree with another woman to carry a child for them, as they are medically incapable of doing so themselves. </p>
<p>The Children’s Act stipulates that after the birth of the child, the commissioning parties will become the legal parents of that child. The surrogate mother must hand over the child as soon as reasonably possible.</p>
<p>The surrogacy agreement is controlled by the high courts and needs to meet certain requirements. These include, among others, consent by all the parties, the use of the gametes of one or both of the commissioning parents, and that they should be unable to produce a child themselves. The requirements furthermore guard against commercial surrogacy and other prohibited practices.</p>
<p>A shortcoming exists in the law. Although the commissioning parents receive their newborns shortly after birth, they do not have access to particular leave from work to fulfil their parental obligations, like natural parents would. </p>
<p>This failure led to an important Labour Court <a href="http://www.saflii.org/za/cases/ZALCD/2015/20.html">decision </a>in 2015. The matter involved a male employee in a same-sex civil union who had applied for maternity leave as his only recourse to properly care for the newborn that had been born to him and his partner through a surrogate agreement. </p>
<p>The employer denied him such leave, arguing that it applied only to pregnant, female employees. The employee claimed unfair discrimination based on gender, sex, sexual orientation and family responsibility.</p>
<p>After arguing that there was no reason why “someone in the position of the applicant” could not also receive “maternity leave” to serve the interests of the child, the Labour Court mentioned in passing that amendments to current labour legislation would be necessary to appropriately address similar situations by specifically catering for commissioning parents.</p>
<h2>South Africa’s leave regime</h2>
<p>From the various types of leave available in terms of South Africa’s <a href="http://www.labour.gov.za/DOL/downloads/legislation/acts/basic-conditions-of-employment/Amended%20Act%20-%20Basic%20Conditions%20of%20Employment.pdf">Basic Conditions of Employment Act</a>, only two are arguably relevant to surrogacy: maternity and family responsibility leave. </p>
<p>However, maternity leave of four months (16 weeks) is only available to pregnant employees to protect the health of both the mother and child before and after birth. The International Labour Organisation <a href="http://www.ilo.org/wcmsp5/groups/public/---dgreports/---dcomm/---publ/documents/publication/wcms_242615.pdf">supports this notion</a>. We submit that maternity leave is not accessible to parents in terms of a surrogacy agreement, given that they do not meet the requirements.</p>
<p>Maternity leave will naturally be available to a surrogate mother who bears the child, as she qualifies as a pregnant employee. We argue that, similarly to circumstances of a miscarriage or stillbirth noted in the Basic Conditions of Employment Act, the mother should only be entitled to six weeks statutory leave <a href="http://www.labour.gov.za/DOL/legislation/acts/basic-conditions-of-employment/read-online/amended-basic-conditions-of-employment-act-21">after the birth</a>. In addition, provisions should nevertheless be made for the possibility that she could use the full maternity leave period if she could provide a medical certificate to support the necessity of extended leave beyond the statutory six weeks. </p>
<figure class="align-right ">
<img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/129404/original/image-20160705-795-1bb8p11.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&amp;q=45&amp;auto=format&amp;w=237&amp;fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/129404/original/image-20160705-795-1bb8p11.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&amp;q=45&amp;auto=format&amp;w=600&amp;h=400&amp;fit=crop&amp;dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/129404/original/image-20160705-795-1bb8p11.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&amp;q=30&amp;auto=format&amp;w=600&amp;h=400&amp;fit=crop&amp;dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/129404/original/image-20160705-795-1bb8p11.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&amp;q=15&amp;auto=format&amp;w=600&amp;h=400&amp;fit=crop&amp;dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/129404/original/image-20160705-795-1bb8p11.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&amp;q=45&amp;auto=format&amp;w=754&amp;h=503&amp;fit=crop&amp;dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/129404/original/image-20160705-795-1bb8p11.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&amp;q=30&amp;auto=format&amp;w=754&amp;h=503&amp;fit=crop&amp;dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/129404/original/image-20160705-795-1bb8p11.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&amp;q=15&amp;auto=format&amp;w=754&amp;h=503&amp;fit=crop&amp;dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Mothers-to-be at an ante-natal class.</span>
<span class="attribution"><span class="source">Shutterstock</span></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>Family responsibility leave, on the other hand, also provides for employees to take leave at the birth of their children in terms of the Act. This type of leave is not gender specific or based upon any health reasons. It can consequently be used by anyone who is the <a href="http://www.labourguide.co.za/conditions-of-employment/343-family-responsibility-leave">legal parent of the child</a>.</p>
<p>In light of the scope of family responsibility leave, the conclusion can be reached that this type of leave will be the only form of recourse that exists for the commissioning parents. Unfortunately the period of leave available in these circumstances only amounts to a period of three days. </p>
<p>Needless to say, the duration of this leave is insufficient to meet the needs of the commissioning parents to care for the child. This gives rise to concern, as commissioning parents have the same parental obligations as traditional parents towards their child. The need for legislative reform can therefore not be denied.</p>
<p>In light of the shortcoming identified by the Labour Court, the <a href="http://www.gov.za/sites/www.gov.za/files/39448_1174.pdf">recent Bill</a> proposes ten weeks of leave for one commissioning parent. It also proposes another ten days ordinary parental leave to the other parent, to be taken from the date of birth of the child.</p>
<p>It is deduced that this leave will be unpaid as the Bill provides, in the proposed section 26, for unemployment benefits to be claimed in terms of the <a href="http://www.gov.za/sites/www.gov.za/files/39448_1174.pdf">Unemployment Insurance Act</a>. It is argued that the disparity between maternity, commissioning and ordinary parental leave could open the door to possible claims of unfair discrimination. The periods proposed could also be extended to serve the best interests of the child during the early development stages.</p>
<h2>Lessons from the UK</h2>
<p>Legal developments in the UK regarding surrogacy provide the best guidance for improving the proposed South African law. The UK law protects all the relevant parties in a surrogacy agreement, including the affected children.</p>
<p>The UK’s <a href="http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2014/6/contents/enacted">Children and Families Act</a>, together with the <a href="http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukdsi/2014/9780111118856/contents">Shared Parental Leave Regulations</a>, brought about significant changes to the country’s labour market by expressly providing shared parental leave to employees who become parents in terms of a surrogacy agreement. </p>
<p>After obtaining a parental order, one commissioning parent qualifies for statutory adoption leave. Should the parent decide not to make use of the full leave period, he or she may transfer the remainder of the leave to the other parent – hence the term “shared parental leave”. One of the key aims of making leave available to both parents, despite their gender, was to enable working parents to equally share in the care of their children.</p>
<h2>The way forward</h2>
<p>Even though the conclusion of surrogacy agreements is acknowledged and regulated in South Africa, the country is lagging behind in addressing surrogacy-related issues in the labour market. Proper legislative intervention is needed to keep track of the changing values of society.</p>
<p>Similar practices to that of the UK in sharing available leave between the parties to a surrogate agreement could be adopted to address the issues above. This would consequently guard against falling behind on issues that are critical to the interest of parents and their children, irrespective of how they were born.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/60071/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>The authors do not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organization that would benefit from this article, and have disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>South African law requires surrogate mothers to hand infants to their legal parents without undue delay. But it doesn't provide leave for these parents to care for their infants. That is set to change.Anri Botes, Senior Lecturer in Labour Law, North-West UniversityLaetitia Fourie, Lecturer in Mercantile Law, University of the Free StateLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/416082015-05-11T20:07:47Z2015-05-11T20:07:47ZFocus on working parents misses true value of universal early childhood services<p>The federal government is abandoning children’s rights to subsidised non-parental care. Apart from 15 hours preschool for four and five-year-olds, the newly announced <a href="http://www.pm.gov.au/media/2015-05-10/jobs-families-child-care-package-delivers-choice-families">childcare package</a> focuses on pushing mothers into paid work or more paid work as a condition of subsidy – unless the child is in need of remedial programs, which may stigmatise many users. This contrasts both with overseas evidence that <a href="https://theconversation.com/why-uk-should-follow-nordics-lead-on-universal-childcare-31989">universal access is better</a> for remedying disadvantage and the <a href="http://www.abc.net.au/lateline/content/2015/s4228099.htm">UK government election promise</a> that all children aged three and older will receive 30 hours of free preschool care, up from 15, because it’s good for all children!</p>
<p>The idea that universal children’s services are an essential part of a network of community services is gone, together with other aspects of good social policies. </p>
<p>Another bad move is proposed cuts to paid parental leave, which will restrict most parents to 18 weeks. The budget plan is to refuse to pay the government benefit if employers fund top-ups. This abandons the recommended minimum standard of 26 weeks, which <a href="http://www.smh.com.au/business/federal-budget/federal-budget-2015-parental-leave-could-be-tony-abbotts-biggest-backflip-yet-20150511-ggyl9j.html">Prime Minister Tony Abbott touted</a> only a few months ago!</p>
<h2>Why the package is unfair and impractical</h2>
<p>There are other serious flaws in the <a href="https://theconversation.com/childcare-package-neither-bold-or-sustainable-41082">childcare proposals</a>, which fail political, fairness and practical tests. To name a few:</p>
<ol>
<li><p>The proposed subsidy changes (A$30 per week on average) may marginally increase affordability for current users but won’t necessarily increase “workforce participation rates” greatly. This is because the policy fails to address non-fee-related reasons for gaps in the supply of services including few services for unprofitable age groups (the under-threes); fewer places in high-cost areas/locations; lack of flexible hours; and local centre waiting lists.</p></li>
<li><p>The policy fails to recognise the problem of the lack of jobs, particularly those with the flexibility needed by parents who wish to enter the workforce. There is an imbalance of <a href="http://www.abs.gov.au/AUSSTATS/abs@.nsf/Lookup/6354.0Main+Features1Feb%202015?OpenDocument">150,000 vacancies</a> versus <a href="http://www.abs.gov.au/ausstats%5Cabs@.nsf/mediareleasesbyCatalogue/46DFE12FCDB783D9CA256B740082AA6C?Opendocument">770,000 job seekers</a>.</p></li>
<li><p>The government cuts to paid parental leave will mean higher demand for baby care, unless parents get a nanny.</p></li>
<li><p>We are now well below most <a href="http://www.oecd.org/els/soc/PF2_1_Parental_leave_systems_1May2014.pdf">OECD countries</a> in funded parental leave, and many big employers may decide to stop picking up what should be government-funded (as the Australian Chamber of Commerce and Industry has <a href="http://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2015/may/10/ending-double-dipping-on-parental-leave-unlikely-to-save-money-business-group">already predicted</a>).</p></li>
</ol>
<p>Are the changes likely to happen? The government has set up barriers that suggest it isn’t seriously committed to the package. Its condition for implementing the childcare changes is the unlikely Senate passing of last year’s <a href="http://www.smh.com.au/business/federal-budget/federal-budget-2014-greatest-family-tax-benefit-sting-in-threshold-for-part-b-20140513-388dh.html">Family Tax Benefit Part B changes</a>. These are particularly nasty, as they remove payments to sole parents and sole-earner couples once their youngest child turns six.</p>
<p>This is the last policy recognition of more traditional families. Such cuts to single-earner couples will <a href="http://www.abc.net.au/news/2015-05-11/childcare-package-overlooks-stay-at-home-parents-nationals-say/6459020">not be popular with the Nationals</a> and remaining conservatives in the Liberals. Despite changes over the past decade or more, which normalised paid work for almost all parents, these last changes are likely to re-open old differences between women. Those in paid jobs support the paid worker push and those not in paid work object to their children’s exclusion from subsidies.</p>
<p>Already, there is talk from the Nationals about income splitting for single-income couples to recognise they have only one tax threshold. These current policies also ignore the job pressures and contribution of time that most mothers and a few fathers make to meet children’s needs. Most parents also contribute considerable volunteer time – in schools, junior sport and elsewhere – which is not recognised in the package.</p>
<p>The earlier announcement of the unnecessary <a href="http://scottmorrison.dss.gov.au/media-releases/246-million-nanny-pilot-programme-to-support-families-in-work">trial nanny program</a> – an existing program is already operating and could be expanded – suggests the newer version will have fewer supervision and skill requirements. The risks of exploitation of workers and poorer quality of care have not been addressed.</p>
<p>The two-year delay in the introduction of the child-care package also raises questions. This leaves lots of time for further undermining of the community aspects of care and cost-cutting. The starting date will be after the next election, so it may not proceed in any recognisable form.</p>
<h2>Savings to fund package open to negotiation</h2>
<p>The <a href="http://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/live/2015/may/11/senate-pushes-back-on-childcare-changes-ahead-of-budget-politics-live#block-554ffc30e4b022027795c7c5">prime minister’s responses</a> on Monday to questions following the announcement of the package were revealing.</p>
<p><strong>Q:</strong> What would you say to the 80,000 mothers and fathers who are told that they won’t be able to access the full paid parental leave scheme that they previously were able to access under the budget? And how can you justify the fact that you’re now cutting access to paid parental leave when you went to two elections with your signature policy of a rolled gold paid parental leave system?</p>
<blockquote>
<p><strong>Abbott:</strong> As you know, the policy that we took to the last election is off the table, and I guess there are all sorts of circumstances that have changed since the last election – certainly circumstances that have changed since the election before – and intelligent governments respond appropriately to circumstances as they evolve.</p>
</blockquote>
<p>Under further questioning, Abbott also indicated that the government was open to alternative savings to fund the package:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>This is a good package, a fair package, a package that will be good for families and good for the economy, so it’s socially desirable and economically desirable, but if we’re going to do it we do have to have offsetting savings, and let’s talk about where those offsetting savings must be, but savings there must be if this package is to go forward.</p>
</blockquote>
<p><strong>Q:</strong> Some of those families who won’t be better off, for example those who would lose Family Tax Benefit B once their youngest child turns six, what do you say to them? They’ll lose in the budget?</p>
<blockquote>
<p><strong>Abbott:</strong> That’s actually a measure from last year’s budget. It’s not a new measure.</p>
</blockquote>
<p><strong>Q:</strong> That needs to be passed to pay for what you’re talking about today?</p>
<blockquote>
<p><strong>Abbott:</strong> It’s one of the measures stalled in the Senate and the point we make is that we can’t go ahead with the child-care initiatives with the “Jobs for Families” package unless we get offsetting savings. We’re prepared to talk to the Labor Party and the crossbench about where these savings will be found but savings must be found for this to go ahead.</p>
</blockquote><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/41608/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Eva Cox tidak bekerja, menjadi konsultan, memiliki saham, atau menerima dana dari perusahaan atau organisasi mana pun yang akan mengambil untung dari artikel ini, dan telah mengungkapkan bahwa ia tidak memiliki afiliasi di luar afiliasi akademis yang telah disebut di atas.</span></em></p>Lost in the political debate about subsidising child care is the fact that universal free preschool care has been abandoned as a goal of good social policy.Eva Cox, Professorial Fellow Jumbunna IHL, University of Technology SydneyLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/340482015-01-07T19:26:31Z2015-01-07T19:26:31ZReturning to work after childbirth: still a case of 'managing it all'<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/67290/original/image-20141216-24303-1idn07n.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&amp;q=45&amp;auto=format&amp;w=496&amp;fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">The social norm of women as care givers has a big impact when women return to work after childbirth.</span> <span class="attribution"><span class="source">Shutterstock</span></span></figcaption></figure><p>The return by women to paid work after maternity or parental leave plays a crucial role in driving our workforce and economy. There is <a href="https://www.wgea.gov.au/employer-profiles/supporting-parents-gives-competitive-edge-construction-firm">growing recognition</a> of the link between supporting employees with caregiving responsibilities, attracting, retaining and developing the best talent, and company competitiveness.</p>
<p>But women’s pregnancy, maternity or parental leave, and return to paid work remain challenging for many organisations, as <a href="https://www.humanrights.gov.au/publications/supporting-working-parents-pregnancy-and-return-work-national-review-report">highlighted</a> by the Sex Discrimination Commissioner earlier this year.</p>
<p>For a mother or couple, the conversation about when to return to paid work, how and at what rate (full-time, part-time, or casual, for example) after child-birth is now the norm compared to decades ago. While there is no doubt that change has occurred, serious challenges remain.</p>
<p>Conducting interviews with women in Victoria, I found a range of negotiations and factors shaping the return to paid work and, post-return.</p>
<h2>Competing demands</h2>
<p>From 82 interviews with pregnant women and mothers - two groups of women interviewed multiple times across pregnancy, maternity leave, return to paid work - it became clear that in order to return to paid work, a woman as worker-carer must go through multiple layers of negotiation. She must manage her paid work, unpaid work and childcare arrangements within the household, in the workplace with her employer, and among networks of extended family, community and other childcare providers. She must also navigate the time limits of leave imposed by policy and her workplace.</p>
<p>There is more to parental leave than simply being able to access paid time away from paid work.</p>
<p>The experiences of how women arrive at and organise their paid work, household, and childcare to return to paid work are often hidden – characterised as private concerns or individual choices. But it is important that we analyse these, and the barriers along the way. This matters, not least of all, because women are returning to paid work under a value system that continues to assume the notion of a male breadwinner.</p>
<p>Some of the themes recounted in my research were: “forced decisions”; “constrained choices”; the stress of “managing it all”; “gender equity in the family-household” (and workplace); and “flexibility in an ideal-worker culture”.</p>
<p>For example, Anna (not her real name) returned to paid work after the birth of her second child, she found managing the unpaid work in the household and time for paid work as well as organising childcare was tough. In order to manage it all, she resigned from her current job until she found suitable childcare, she then took up a part-time job at a different workplace, instead of full-time, yet dropped four salary levels in doing so, and outsourced some of the household work. The problem of “managing it all” was a key issue. </p>
<blockquote>
<p>I knew I wouldn’t be able to work until I had childcare sorted out. Trying to get adequate childcare for two children - it’s like finding a needle in a haystack.</p>
</blockquote>
<p>Like Anna, some of the women in my study described “dropping back” from full-time to part-time work to manage the competing demands of paid work, having a baby and additional unpaid domestic work. Another participant, who returned to part-time paid work, chose a lower-paying job over another, in return for a more flexible and supportive work culture.</p>
<p>I also found that partners’ and/or father’s perceptions of and use of parental leave play an important part. Expectations from past generations of the role of fathers as breadwinners are a barrier to men participating in childcare and fully utilising flexible working arrangements.</p>
<p>This is why the <a href="http://www.humanservices.gov.au/customer/services/centrelink/dad-and-partner-pay">Dad and Partner Pay scheme</a>, implemented in 2013 as part of the <a href="http://www.fairwork.gov.au/leave/maternity-and-parental-leave/paid-parental-leave">Paid Parental Leave</a> scheme under the Gillard government in 2011 (around the time this study was completed), is important. It supports the involvement of fathers and partners in caregiving.</p>
<h2>Mothers as carers</h2>
<p>It is good to see that <a href="https://theconversation.com/fighting-for-fatherhood-the-other-glass-ceiling-29325">fatherhood</a>, <a href="https://theconversation.com/time-for-the-g20-to-invest-in-gender-equality-23609">productivity, gender equity</a> and <a href="https://theconversation.com/for-women-to-have-it-all-we-have-to-change-the-way-we-work-8096">work-life</a> have gained interest on the national policy agenda in Australia in recent years.</p>
<p>One of the factors that seems to really constrain change in terms of gender equality is the heavily gendered notion of the seemingly “natural” role of motherhood and women as primary caregivers. Such norms are especially costly to women who end up paying a substantial “care penalty” when they shoulder a disproportionate burden of care giving. </p>
<p>This obligation compounds the difficulties faced by women of taking time out of paid work and then negotiating a return. And these “care penalties” coexist alongside a major cultural double standard in which women’s care giving is consistently devalued.</p>
<h2>What might help?</h2>
<p>In order to move forward to a more equitable system for parental leave and work-life, we must address these underpinning assumptions. Further research is needed. </p>
<p>Over the past few years I have been following debates about new practices and communication technologies and their “disruptive” or “enabling” qualities for flexible work and work-life balance. There is workplace support for such technologies, but there are also downsides. One interviewee told me that while such technology facilitates her paid work-life, it also intensifies it, as she responded to paid work enquiries around the clock. </p>
<p>Currently, I’m carrying out research on managing paid work and care in the entertainment industry. The way we work in the digital and creative sectors of the economy, and what that says about us as a society, is important.</p>
<p>These are complex and perennial issues for managers, unions, governments, and households. They evoke sensitivity because they make us question what is valued, rewarded and expected.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/34048/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Sheree Gregory was a post-doctoral research fellow at The Swinburne Institute for Social Research from 2011 to 2013, funded under the Australian Research Council Linkage scheme; during her PhD she was a research assistant in Social Science at RMIT University, and in Education at the University of Melbourne, both funded under the Australian Research Council Linkage scheme. Currently, she is a joint author of research papers for a project on women, equity and international mining (funded by the Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade - AusAid scheme).</span></em></p>The return by women to paid work after maternity or parental leave plays a crucial role in driving our workforce and economy. There is growing recognition of the link between supporting employees with…Sheree Gregory, Lecturer (specialist in Cultural Labour), RMIT UniversityLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/322042014-10-06T19:34:35Z2014-10-06T19:34:35ZWe can learn a lot about public policy from the Nordic nations<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/60411/original/b2ckt9vr-1412080159.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&amp;q=45&amp;auto=format&amp;w=496&amp;fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">Nordic nations enjoy regulated working hours, substantial welfare provision and strong economies.</span> <span class="attribution"><span class="source">www.shutterstock.com</span></span></figcaption></figure><p>At the end of this month Australia’s Productivity Commission will issue the final report of its inquiry into <a href="http://pc.gov.au/projects/inquiry/childcare">Early Childhood Education and Care</a>. </p>
<p>The inquiry was limited from the outset by the requirement that changes must be within existing funding parameters. Although asked to review alternative approaches that are used overseas, it was directed towards New Zealand’s precedent of subsidising at-home carers or nannies. The inquiry failed to consider the far more successful and comprehensive policy approach taken by Sweden and other Nordic nations.</p>
<p>The OECD has <a href="http://www.oecdbetterlifeindex.org/topics/work-life-balance/">identified Australia</a> as one of a small number of countries in which long working hours are common. In comparison, parents in Sweden and the other main Nordic countries have working weeks shorter than the OECD average. This is in addition to their substantial paid parental leave and publicly provided child care.</p>
<p>Shorter working hours allow parents from Sweden to pick up their children after work without the time pressures Australian parents face.</p>
<p>Australia will probably move to make child-care centre hours more flexible to suit our long working hours. However, the government should encourage shorter working hours, which are more compatible with family life.</p>
<p>Crumbling boundaries between work and home in Australia are leading to considerable and increasing unpaid work and causing social harm. More than three million workers in Australia are now losing sleep because of work stress. </p>
<p>According to the <a href="http://www.tai.org.au/content/hard-get-break-1">Australia Institute</a>,</p>
<blockquote>
<p>The current labour environment is contributing to high levels of stress and anxiety; sleep loss and depression for many Australians. This has adverse effects on their health, family life and relationships.</p>
</blockquote>
<p>This is also an impediment to greater economic productivity. </p>
<h2>Policies for the people</h2>
<p>Sweden acts as a good point of comparison for Australia – and not just in terms of child care. Its social policies have proved to be very successful in terms of economic outcomes and at the polls.</p>
<p>The Social Democratic Party and allied parties were returned to office in <a href="http://www.washingtonpost.com/world/europe/power-shift-expected-in-swedish-election/2014/09/14/7b1d1918-3bc4-11e4-a023-1d61f7f31a05_story.html">the Swedish election</a> on September 18 this year. No party other than the Social Democrats has governed for more than two consecutive terms in Sweden since 1932. </p>
<p>If, as is likely, the new government goes on to serve its full four-year term, by 2018 the Social Democrats will have led the government for 69 of the 86 years since 1932 – or more than 80% of that time.</p>
<p>This unparalleled electoral and policy success over a very long period makes the Swedish Social Democrats the most successful political party in the world.
Much of this can be attributed to the party’s policies of regulated working hours and substantial welfare provision. </p>
<p>Even when the Social Democratic Party did suffer serious setbacks to its primary vote in recent years (it was out of office for two terms from 2006 to 2014), its opponents had to concede much policy ground to beat the party and its allies. </p>
<p>Voters did not reject the fundamentals of the welfare state. Nor did the Swedish people vote in favour of more economic inequality on the scale that it exists in the English-speaking world.</p>
<p>The Feminist Initiative party is one of several left-of-centre parties whose vote increased in the 2014 election. The new party fell short of parliamentary representation this time, but is likely to continue to grow. It will contribute to a more varied left-of-centre electoral coalition, which can be expected to further strengthen Sweden’s accomplishments in gender equality.</p>
<p>Other similar political parties within the Nordic nations have been repeatedly popular in the polls. This includes the Danish Social Democrats and Norwegian Labour Party.</p>
<p>In Finland, the Social Democratic Party has not been as electorally dominant but has also had considerable influence, particularly in education policy. </p>
<p>These Nordic social democratic parties have managed to avoid thoroughly following neoliberal economic policies, unlike many English-speaking countries, yet have run some of the <a href="http://www.weforum.org/reports/global-competitiveness-report-2013-2014">most successful of the developed economies</a>. They are proof of how left-of-centre parties can, with clear objectives, set the policy agenda in developed nations. Studying their lasting policy achievements is therefore of immense value for social democrats across the world and for the Labor Party in Australia. </p>
<h2>The Nordic success story</h2>
<p>Sweden and the other main Nordic nations continue to provide living proof that economic prosperity can be combined with social equality and environmental responsibility.</p>
<p>In terms of income distribution these countries have <a href="http://www.oecd.org/social/soc/dividedwestandwhyinequalitykeepsrising.htm">much more equality</a> than Australia, Britain, New Zealand and Canada – and nearly twice as much as the United States. </p>
<p>Workforce participation rates are high in the Nordic nations but working hours remain within reasonable limits, enabling genuine <a href="https://www.newsouthbooks.com.au/books/time-bomb_work-rest-and-play-in-australia-today/">work-life balance</a>. </p>
<p>Sweden has played a leading role in lowering poverty and improving <a href="http://www.deakin.edu.au/arts-ed/ccg/cgrp-pdf/ccg-rps-vol3-special-issue.pdf">well-being among children</a>, including through the provision of extensive paid parental leave. </p>
<p>Finland has achieved <a href="https://www.sensepublishers.com/media/655-miracle-of-education.pdf">stunning success in schools</a> since the 1990s. </p>
<p>Denmark, like Sweden, invests in comprehensive skills training as part of providing security and flexibility in employment. This includes quality skills retraining programs of the kind which Australia’s car industry workers will need. Investment in these programs has <a href="http://www.oecd-ilibrary.org/economics/oecd-historical-statistics_19962061">kept unemployment in Denmark lower</a> than Australia in all but one of the years between the early 1990s recession and the 2008 global financial crisis. </p>
<p>Meanwhile, Norway’s approach to taxation has ensured that natural resources are used sustainably <a href="http://www.regjeringen.no/en/dep/fin/Selected-topics/the-government-pension-fund.html?id=1441">for the nation’s long-term wealth</a>. </p>
<p>All these achievements support the argument that Australia should look to the approach adopted by these Nordic countries when developing our own policies.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/32204/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Andrew Scott is the author of the book Northern Lights: The Positive Policy Example of Sweden, Finland, Denmark and Norway, to be published in November.</span></em></p>At the end of this month Australia’s Productivity Commission will issue the final report of its inquiry into Early Childhood Education and Care. The inquiry was limited from the outset by the requirement…Andrew Scott, Associate Professor in Politics and Policy, Deakin UniversityLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/287862014-07-23T06:43:54Z2014-07-23T06:43:54ZShared parental leave is a nice idea – but will it actually work?<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/54546/original/c949h5w3-1406029553.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&amp;q=45&amp;auto=format&amp;w=496&amp;fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">Parenting isn&#39;t just a day off work.</span> <span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="http://www.shutterstock.com/pic-192647348/stock-photo-confused-businessman-holding-a-crying-baby-isolated-on-white-background.html?src=ZJsfo9nDG85p2rkm2DV8uQ-1-67">Shutterstock</a></span></figcaption></figure><p>According to <a href="http://www.natcen.ac.uk/our-research/research/fathers,-work-and-families-in-twenty-first-century-britain/">NatCen research</a>, British fathers are among the worst in Europe at making time for their families. </p>
<p>Spending huge amounts of time at work is seen as a sign of discipline and commitment, while fathers who choose to spend more time with their families are often forced out of their (full-time) jobs. Their departure, however, carries more stigma than women’s leaving might. </p>
<p>This is a ridiculous situation. Women have long been expected to take more time off from work to care for children (or other dependants) than men – and they still do. This practice has become a major problem for the “female worker”; wary of losing employees, employers often refrain from <a href="https://www.gov.uk/government/news/1m-million-to-help-tackle-pregnancy-discrimination-in-the-workplace">hiring or promoting women</a>. </p>
<p>As long as men take little or no time off to care for their families while women take a lot more, the pattern can be expected to persist. To put it another way, the costs of having children are still disproportionately borne by all women, while the benefits of producing generations of future workers are shared equally.</p>
<p>On the face of it, the government’s <a href="https://www.gov.uk/government/news/shared-parental-leave">new Shared Parental Leave scheme</a>, which will come into force later in 2014, offers an appealing solution. </p>
<h2>Game change?</h2>
<p>The government’s stated aim for the policy is</p>
<blockquote>
<p>To create a new, more equal system which allows both parents to keep a strong link to their workplace.</p>
</blockquote>
<p>Among other things, the scheme will allow mothers to return to work more quickly by handing over unused maternity leave days to fathers at any point after the initial two-week recovery period; parents will be able to choose how to split leave days, and will be entitled to the same rights that would have applied had they been at work, with the exception of pay. That notwithstanding, fathers will retain their right to a two-week ordinary paternity leave. </p>
<p>To be sure, the <a href="http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2014/6/contents/enacted">Children and Families Act</a>, of which the new <a href="https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/286672/bis-14-629-draft-shared-parental-leave-regulations-2014.pdf">Shared Parental Leave regulation</a> is a major feature, is a well-meant piece of legislation, intended to give parents more job security and more control over family life. One of its main virtues is that it not only grants fathers (or the other parent) the equal right to be with their newborns (or adopted child), but also affords children time at home with both parents. </p>
<p>This could reshuffle working parents’ opportunities and constraints, and transform the aspirations and expectations of both parents and employers. Granting fathers access to more paid (and job-protected) time with their children could help redistribute caring and paid work in the family; meanwhile, a greater number of fathers spending more time with their families could help form new norms for contemporary fathering and masculinity.</p>
<p>Our employment practices and decisions about balancing work and family arise from the interplay of policies, economic structures, cultural norms, and historic trajectories. Different institutional arrangements shape people’s lives very differently, but by treating men as equally adequate and likely caregivers, the new approach to sharing parental leave could be a major advance for gender equality (it could also enable <a href="http://careers.theguardian.com/careers-blog/same-sex-parenting-leave-entitlement">same-sex couples</a> to balance working-family life on a more equal basis). </p>
<p>But outside the UK, of course, these ideas are not new. Similar policies took shape 40 years ago in countries such as <a href="http://www.oecd.org/fr/els/famille/swedenssupportforparentswithchildreniscomprehensiveandeffectivebutexpensive.htm">Sweden</a> and <a href="http://www.leavenetwork.org/fileadmin/Leavenetwork/Country_notes/2014/Slovenia.FINAL.pdf">Slovenia</a>, whose governments endorsed (in principle) the notion that both mothers and fathers could and should care for their children on equal terms – arrangements that, in law at least, persist today.</p>
<h2>Rights and responsibilities</h2>
<p><a href="http://esp.sagepub.com/content/24/3/240.full.pdf+html">But the design of laws is every bit as important as the intentions behind them</a> – and four decades down the road, we can now judge how successful Sweden and Slovenia’s initial equal leave strategies were. The evidence is not good: fathers who chose to take leave were few, and increases were <a href="http://www.ingentaconnect.com/content/tpp/frs/2014/00000003/00000001/art00004?token=004e1288347b76504c4866462550233e2f7c7a4476556a332b257d7241255e4e6b63312779ef60">slow</a>: <a href="http://nowbase.org/%7E/media/Projekt%20sites/Nowbase/Publikationer/Trygtext/Social%20protection/Trygtext%202003%20GB.ashx">7-9% in Sweden</a>, and <a href="http://www.stat.si/eng/novica_prikazi.aspx?id=2434">1-5% in Slovenia</a>.</p>
<p>This is a sign that the UK government’s light-touch solution probably won’t work, for exactly the same reasons it ultimately fell flat in Sweden and Slovenia. By merely presenting parents with rights, not incentives or requirements, those countries’ initial approaches <a href="https://www.myfamilycare.co.uk/news/questions/shared-parental-leave-part-1.html">failed to engage parents in voluntarily sharing leave</a>. </p>
<p>Framing parental leave as a joint right does little to increase the chances of parents actually sharing it more equally; indeed, some see a rebalancing towards fathering as a mother’s loss. For a feminist who believes in a more equitable division of labour in the family, arguments that many women do not want to share leave with men are disheartening to say the least – to say nothing of the sight of women who choose to return to work early being derided as bad mothers in the court of public opinion. </p>
<p>If we want to generate more fundamental change, opening up freedom of choice is not enough. As things now stand, parents tend to shy away from sharing parental leave. In the Nordic countries, this was the catalyst for introducing so-called “<a href="http://www.nikk.no/en/news/should-daddy-stay-home-with-the-baby/">daddy quotas</a>”, which allocated specific leave time solely for fathers. While those laws were initially introduced in the 1990s, we’re already starting to see their profound impact on parenting practices.</p>
<p>In these countries’ experience, explicitly <a href="http://www.nikk.no/en/news/many-obstacles-for-danish-dads/">earmarking</a> leave for fathers and introducing a <a href="http://europa.eu/epic/practices-that-work/practice-user-registry/practices/gender-equality-bonus_en.htm">gender equality bonus</a> for those who share leave more equally significantly increased fathers’ take-up of available leave. A snowball effect counteracted the stigma attached to fathers taking more time off, and the time working fathers spent with their children increased. </p>
<p>The British government’s failure to propose a more forceful “use it or lose it” structure, designed to create incentives and not just rights, means this well-intentioned effort to de-gender childcare rings hollow. </p>
<p>If the government is serious about improving people’s lives, it needs a clearer and more committed vision of how a good and sustainable society would look, not just a commitment to choice. The formula is simple: the better the state and employers both care for their people with concrete and clearly articulated support, the better people will respond.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/28786/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Jana Javornik does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organization that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>According to NatCen research, British fathers are among the worst in Europe at making time for their families. Spending huge amounts of time at work is seen as a sign of discipline and commitment, while…Jana Javornik, Post-doctoral Research Fellow in Work, Care and Global Transitions, Building Sustainable Societies Programme, University of LeedsLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/266582014-05-13T10:02:19Z2014-05-13T10:02:19ZInfographic: federal budget at a glance<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/48552/original/6k9jpmxx-1400117053.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&amp;q=45&amp;auto=format&amp;w=496&amp;fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">cormann</span> </figcaption></figure><figure class="align-center zoomable">
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/48444/original/z3s3mb5t-1400036305.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&amp;q=45&amp;auto=format&amp;w=1000&amp;fit=clip"><img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/48444/original/z3s3mb5t-1400036305.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&amp;q=45&amp;auto=format&amp;w=754&amp;fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/48444/original/z3s3mb5t-1400036305.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&amp;q=45&amp;auto=format&amp;w=600&amp;h=4534&amp;fit=crop&amp;dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/48444/original/z3s3mb5t-1400036305.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&amp;q=30&amp;auto=format&amp;w=600&amp;h=4534&amp;fit=crop&amp;dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/48444/original/z3s3mb5t-1400036305.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&amp;q=15&amp;auto=format&amp;w=600&amp;h=4534&amp;fit=crop&amp;dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/48444/original/z3s3mb5t-1400036305.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&amp;q=45&amp;auto=format&amp;w=754&amp;h=5698&amp;fit=crop&amp;dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/48444/original/z3s3mb5t-1400036305.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&amp;q=30&amp;auto=format&amp;w=754&amp;h=5698&amp;fit=crop&amp;dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/48444/original/z3s3mb5t-1400036305.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&amp;q=15&amp;auto=format&amp;w=754&amp;h=5698&amp;fit=crop&amp;dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px"></a>
<figcaption>
<span class="caption"></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p><em>Since publication this infographic has been amended. The original version stated the NDIS was scaled back. There are no planned cuts to the funding of the NDIS.</em></p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/26658/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
Since publication this infographic has been amended. The original version stated the NDIS was scaled back. There are no planned cuts to the funding of the NDIS.Charis Palmer, Deputy Editor/Chief of StaffEmil Jeyaratnam, Data + Interactives Editor, The ConversationLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/172852013-08-22T05:34:36Z2013-08-22T05:34:36ZFactCheck Q&A: do women under 50 make up just 2% of people on $100,000 a year?<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/29797/original/c6rdm83h-1377232076.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&amp;q=45&amp;auto=format&amp;w=496&amp;fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">Shadow Treasurer Joe Hockey on Q&amp;A&#39;s National Economic Debate.</span> </figcaption></figure><figure>
<iframe width="440" height="260" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/01_HkEWEWjM?wmode=transparent&amp;start=0" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>
<figcaption><span class="caption">Treasurer Chris Bowen and Shadow Treasurer Joe Hockey faced off in an economic debate.</span></figcaption>
</figure>
<blockquote>
<p><strong>“The biggest beneficiaries [of the Coalition’s Paid Parental Leave scheme] are the women of Australia. Of all the people earning A$100,000 a year under the age of 50, 2% are women. Just 2% are women. How is that fair in a modern society?” - Shadow Treasurer Joe Hockey, ABC Q&amp;A, August 19. (<a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=01_HkEWEWjM&amp;t=35m4s">Watch the segment on Paid Parental Leave here.</a>)</strong></p>
</blockquote>
<p>The Coalition is planning to introduce a Paid Parental Leave Scheme (PPL) if elected, which would see all women paid their current wage plus superannuation for six months, up to a limit of A$75,000. The stated <a href="http://www.liberal.org.au/latest-news/2013/08/18/tony-abbott-coalitions-paid-parental-leave-scheme">rationale for the policy </a> is to benefit women and families, to benefit the economy through higher participation of women in paid work, and to benefit the baby.</p>
<p>Talking about the Coalition’s proposal on Q&amp;A’s <a href="http://www.abc.net.au/tv/qanda/">economic debate</a>, the shadow treasurer drew attention to the under-representation of women in the highest income brackets. But is the quoted statistic of 2% correct?</p>
<h2>Is the statistic correct?</h2>
<p>The Conversation’s <em>Election FactCheck</em> team contacted Hockey’s office to ask for a source for the claim that “of all the people earning A$100,000 a year under the age of 50, 2% are women”.</p>
<p>His spokesman replied: “You will find the information from the <a href="http://www.ato.gov.au/uploadedFiles/Content/CR/Research_and_statistics/In_detail/Downloads/cor00345977_2011TAXSTATS.pdf">Australian Tax Office (ATO) taxation statistics</a> - and it was sourced from the most recent published figures.”</p>
<p>The relevant details of lodged returns for the tax year 2010-2011 can be found in Table 14 of that report, <a href="http://www.ato.gov.au/About-ATO/Research-and-statistics/In-detail/Tax-statistics/Taxation-statistics-2010-11/?page=8#Individuals'_tax">which can be downloaded here</a>. Of 1.035 million people who lodged a return with an income of A$101,350 or more a year, there were 235,775 or 24.5% females. </p>
<p>However, this table does not allow us to focus on the under 50 age group that Hockey mentioned.</p>
<p>So I interrogated the Australian Bureau of Statistics Census 2011 Database and classified the men and women alive at that time into five-year age groups and 10 income groups. The highest category is A$2000+ per week, or people earning $104,000+ a year, not identical to the A$100,000 quoted by Hockey, but close.</p>
<p>Of the 11.848 million people under 50 years of age, we find that 848,865 earned A$104,000 or more a year, of whom 201,805 or 23.8% were female.</p>
<p>So it appears that the figure of 2% quoted by Hockey was incorrect, by a factor of 10. </p>
<h2>Why context is crucial</h2>
<p>Could Hockey have been referring to a particular type of person, say full-time workers or part-time workers?</p>
<p>For full-time workers only, of those earning A$104,000 or more a year, 20.5% are women.</p>
<p>For part-time workers, the figure is 54.1%. So among part-time workers, females actually dominate males in the highest income category. </p>
<p>Why is it so large? Because almost 70% of part-time workers are women. Of course, females will dominate all income categories if you focus on part-time workers. For the same reason, females are over-represented amongst the highly paid for people aged in their nineties - because women live longer. </p>
<p>This same issue contaminates the 23.8% figure that I calculated above: it is partly small because women are under-represented among full-time workers, making up only 36.1% of the total. This is a separate issue to any differences in income that exist for those in full-time paid employment.</p>
<h2>A fair answer to a fair question</h2>
<p>If one is concerned about fairness, which was mentioned explicitly in Hockey’s quote, then it make more sense to look at each gender and ask what proportion are in the highest income groups.</p>
<p>Using the same ABS database, we find that 5.0% of people earn over A$2000 a week or more. However, for males the figure is 7.8% and for females it is 2.3%. </p>
<p>This 2.3% may have been the figure that Hockey was referring to.</p>
<p>Hockey then provided commentary that the 2.3% figure demonstrated an unfair outcome for women. But by itself, the 2.3% figure tells us only that high incomes are rare. It is only when we compare it to the 5.0% average for both sexes or the 7.8% figure for men that it can be put in context.</p>
<h2>Damned lies and statistics</h2>
<p>Beware of statistics that focus on narrow sub-groups. Restricting attention to sub-groups can change results drastically, if that subgroup is very different to the whole.</p>
<p>For instance, if we restrict our attention to vocations that are male-dominated, such as the building industry, we would expect to find fewer highly-paid females. </p>
<p>Secondly, if you want to exaggerate the difference between two groups, then compare the proportions in the extremes. For example, of people over 6 feet in height, most are male. Of those over 7 feet in height, almost all are male.</p>
<p>In the case of income inequality, looking at those who earn more than A$2000 per week is done for a legitimate reason. Moreover, it happens that the comparison does not become more extreme at higher income levels. Among those earning more than A$4000 per week, the proportion of females is again around 24%.</p>
<h2>The right set of numbers</h2>
<p>Hockey may have meant to say that around 2% of women earn more than A$100,000 - which would have been correct. This kind of mistake is easy to make, especially under the stress of a televised debate.</p>
<p>However, this figure by itself is still irrelevant to gender disparities until it is compared with the equivalent figure (7.8%) for males. His commentary that the 2% figure demonstrates unfairness was misguided.</p>
<p>If Hockey wanted to argue that the Coalition’s paid parental leave scheme will help women to remain in work, benefiting both women and the economy, then it would have been better for him to quote the proportion of women in full-time and part-time work, and then explain how the scheme would increase these figures.</p>
<p>If he wanted to argue that women are unfairly paid, then he should have quoted the 2.3% and 7.8% figures together, and explained how a more generous paid parental leave scheme might lead to less women leaving the workforce and progressing to jobs with higher wages.</p>
<h2>Verdict</h2>
<p>Joe Hockey’s claim that of all the people earning A$100,000 a year under the age of 50, 2% are women is false. The correct figure is around 24%.</p>
<p><div class="callout">The Conversation is fact checking statements made in the lead-up to this year’s federal election. Normally, these are reviewed. But each week, we will also check significant factual assertions on the ABC’s Q&amp;A program. To allow us to publish these checks as soon as possible, there will be no review process. Request a check at checkit@theconversation.edu.au. Please include the statement you would like us to check, the date it was made, and a link if possible.</div></p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/17285/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Chris Lloyd does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>“The biggest beneficiaries [of the Coalition’s Paid Parental Leave scheme] are the women of Australia. Of all the people earning A$100,000 a year under the age of 50, 2% are women. Just 2% are women. How…Chris Lloyd, Professor of Business Statistics, Melbourne Business School, University of MelbourneLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/139472013-05-06T20:35:13Z2013-05-06T20:35:13ZAre feminists opposing Abbott's paid parental leave scheme on personality grounds only?<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/23275/original/d7hfzv86-1367821410.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&amp;q=45&amp;auto=format&amp;w=496&amp;fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">Opposition leader Tony Abbott is under pressure to drop his signature paid parental leave scheme ahead of this year&#39;s federal election.</span> <span class="attribution"><span class="source">AAP/Dave Hunt</span></span></figcaption></figure><p>There is an odd consensus emerging between <a href="http://www.abc.net.au/am/content/2013/s3752227.htm">conservative Liberals opposed</a> to their own leader’s paid parental leave scheme and defenders of the <a href="http://www.smh.com.au/federal-election/gillard-fires-up-over-parental-leave-20100731-110q0.html">Gillard government’s version</a> of the same policy. </p>
<p>Into the strange mix, we can throw the <a href="http://www.afr.com/p/national/drop_abbott_paid_parental_leave_otoRi9yP6nej1pkwnHEfVJ">business sector</a>, which also opposes the contentious Abbott scheme.</p>
<p>The business excuse is that it is paid out of a new levy on business - their view is obviously self-interested - but the motives of the conservative Liberals are less clear.</p>
<p>Paid parental leave draws justifications and criticisms from various quarters. At a basic level, it is difficult to oppose a payment that ensures mothers the time off work required to bond with newborns.</p>
<p>This is obviously a health issue. But if the rationale behind the move is to ensure that lower income families have the money to allow the mother to take that vital time, then we’re drifting into the realm of welfare policy. </p>
<p>The more radical basis for arguing for parental leave is to set up it up as an ongoing workplace entitlement. Feminists have long argued for parenting time to be recognised as a legitimate employee entitlement, like holiday pay, sick pay and long service leave, as part of a wider effort to normalise parenting in workplaces.</p>
<p>Interestingly, Tony Abbott’s pitch for his version of paid parental leave is closer to the feminist angle than the health or welfare justifications. He has designed a payment that meets so many traditional feminist demands. This is not just an argument about the needs of children - important as these may be - but the value women workers bring in improving productivity via greater participation. Recognising parents’ role in workplaces fits this model.</p>
<p>The campaign by feminists and others to introduce a paid parental leave scheme has a long history. An initial victory in the late 1970s put in place the right of employees to take up to 12 months unpaid maternity leave if they had 12 month continuous services with the same employer. </p>
<p>This change was disappointingly not followed by a leave payment, despite various campaigns, reports and even interventions by the Human Rights Commission.</p>
<p>The last major effort to introduce a paid parental leave scheme was driven by Pru Goward. It recommended 14 weeks paid maternity leave in a scheme similar to the current Gillard plan, except it was to be paid up to and not at the minumum wage level. </p>
<p>This was not acceptable to the Howard government as it was linked to paid workers and didn’t cover women at home. The Howard answer instead was a A$3000 baby bonus paid to all mothers, soon rising to A$5000.</p>
<p>After ejecting Howard in 2007, the Rudd Labor government referred the issue to the Productivity Commission which produced yet another version bearing considerable similarities to Pru Goward’s model. The government accepted and introduced this and by 2011, it was operational. Parents are now entitled to 18 weeks pay but can no longer claim the baby bonus and some Family Tax benefits.</p>
<p>It was, as was the earlier version, an odd mix of welfare-type payment and workplace attachment. However, it has some serious flaws. The standard payment of the minimum wage bears no relationship to actual earnings - and the source of the payment is Centrelink - making it just another form of welfare payment.</p>
<p>Some part-time workers receive more that they were paid while working and others significantly less. There is also no connected leave or the right of return to your job. These rights are available only to those mothers who have been employed for 12 months by the same employer, as with the entitlement under the separate legislation for unpaid maternity leave.</p>
<figure class="align-center ">
<img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/23280/original/y6syxmk9-1367828797.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&amp;q=45&amp;auto=format&amp;w=754&amp;fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/23280/original/y6syxmk9-1367828797.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&amp;q=45&amp;auto=format&amp;w=600&amp;h=406&amp;fit=crop&amp;dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/23280/original/y6syxmk9-1367828797.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&amp;q=30&amp;auto=format&amp;w=600&amp;h=406&amp;fit=crop&amp;dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/23280/original/y6syxmk9-1367828797.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&amp;q=15&amp;auto=format&amp;w=600&amp;h=406&amp;fit=crop&amp;dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/23280/original/y6syxmk9-1367828797.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&amp;q=45&amp;auto=format&amp;w=754&amp;h=511&amp;fit=crop&amp;dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/23280/original/y6syxmk9-1367828797.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&amp;q=30&amp;auto=format&amp;w=754&amp;h=511&amp;fit=crop&amp;dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/23280/original/y6syxmk9-1367828797.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&amp;q=15&amp;auto=format&amp;w=754&amp;h=511&amp;fit=crop&amp;dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Under the current paid parental leave scheme introduced by the Gillard government, parents are entitled to 18 weeks pay following the birth of a child.</span>
<span class="attribution"><span class="source">AAP/Alan Porritt</span></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>So why have so few feminists been openly supportive of the Abbott scheme? On what the information available so far, it seems to be pretty much what many have long campaigned for: replacement income and 26 weeks leave. </p>
<p>Could the reason for the lack of support be related to who proposed it than what it is? Abbott has a <a href="https://theconversation.com/tony-abbott-a-confused-conservative-sexist-but-not-a-misogynist-11509">history of sexism</a> and anti-fertility control so opposition to his proposal could stem from his past record.</p>
<p>This is Abbott’s opportunity to show he has changed. If he were to deliver on this scheme and fix the two anomalies (connected leave and right of return) he would be offering a better scheme than the present one. He could then seriously claim that he really was committed to changing workplace cultures, not just the incomes of women. </p>
<p>He would need to insert the right to return to the job and align the right to take leave with eligibility for the payment for those who recently changed jobs, as these omissions exclude many low income earners in casual jobs. </p>
<p>Paying a form of parental leave that both covered these anomalies and replaced income for nearly all women would be a significant progression for Australia. Having it paid by a levy on business makes sense, as business benefits from not having to make the payments out of individual profits.</p>
<p>The fuss about the very few possible high income claimants is a distraction. Most women in upper income brackets are either older and have had children or are not likely to have children. As so few female high earners are likely to have babies that is the problem we need to solve.</p>
<p>We need to change the far too common workplace cultures that demand women behave like male employees in attempting to separate paid work from other parts of life. </p>
<p>Starting with a clearly work related paid parental scheme would be one further step in that direction. Even if it is Tony Abbott offering it.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/13947/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Eva Cox does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organization that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>There is an odd consensus emerging between conservative Liberals opposed to their own leader’s paid parental leave scheme and defenders of the Gillard government’s version of the same policy. Into the…Eva Cox, Professorial Fellow Jumbunna IHL, University of Technology SydneyLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.